sw1mushfandomcom-20200215-history
Talk:System Transponders
Perhaps this information should be merged into the individual articles? For instance, the Athaniss transponder / coordinates could be added to the Athaniss article. This info seems like it might make a good addition to the template. -- Xerxes 20:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC) *That does sound like a very good, sensible idea. It'll be time-consuming to add, but I think it would be worth the convenience in the end, and a template tweak would be (as far as I know) really easy to slap in. -- Del *Indeed, it shouldn't be difficult, only time consuming. It would be very handy to move this info and keep this page as a very quick reference. Or be removed entirely. Also it would be a good idea to update the info. For example Ord Mantell is not in there. --Aayla 23:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC) *The reason Ord Mantell is not "in there" is because it has not been added to SWINFO. And, judging by past trends, it probably won't be there for quite some time. This is one of the prominent reasons as to why the Wiki is much more effective and efficient than SWINFO. Besides Ord Mantell, there are several planets/objects that should be removed from the list as well. Also, another issue I must stress is that the position of systems/planets is not canon, not correct, and only relative to the game's code system. That's it. That's where it ends. There could very well be a reassessment of what the coordinates are for these/any celestial objects, but again, this is up to the admins' prerogative. Now, I could certainly add a coordinate field to the template, sure, and I could do that in the next day or so... but I'd like to see something done regarding the issues I've mentioned above. -- Hawke / Rtufo 06:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC) ** "...''not canon, not correct, and only relative to the game's code system..."'' I would submit that not canon doesn't mean incorrect, and relative to the game's code system means that it is correct. If the field represents the In-Game system coordinates and the value of the field matches the In-Game system coordinates...that's accurate information. If at some point the administration decides to reassess the coordinates and bring them into alignment with other sources, the updatable nature of the wiki will make that easier. Everyone is equally welcome to suggest that course of action to the admin staff as others previously have; however, until it happens, the current data is correct as it corresponds to the most canon resource we have, the MUSH. I'm not sure what other course of action you're considering / suggesting or think we're in a position to demand. Perhaps a good next step would be a forum post listing the 'right' coordinates? In my experience, the more worked-out an idea is, the more likely it is to get admin approval. -- Xerxes 18:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC) **That is why I originally posted that info on here. Because updating the information on a wiki is much more simple than updating information on the MUSH command SWINFO. And about this data not being canon to the Star Wars universe, I agree. But this is a wiki for the MUSH and not a Star Wars Wiki (like Wookiepedia). So this information, in my opinion, is correct for the MUSH, and should be added here. I really want to hear more about your thoughts.--Aayla 18:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC) ***I second Xerxes and Aayla on this one. "Canon" as it relates to this wiki is in reference to the MUSH and NO OTHER SOURCES. Period, finito, end of line. Further, this wiki is not an intrinsic part of the MUSH, it is an optional supplement. The MUSH dictates what appears on the wiki, NOT the other way around, and that is not something I can ever see changing. Nor would I want to. As to your other issues, Hawke, take them to the MUSH admin if you want to, but raising them here and not there isn't going to get you very far. -- Del * I believe we've strayed from the original topic. While the conflict between the DarrienSpace coordinates in the MUSH and the agreed upon 'canon' locations (for instance, the galactic map we use for reference all the time) is a relevant topic for discussion, it's not something that can really be solved on this Talk page and is probably most effectively debated separately. What can be figured out is how best to present the system coordinate information on the wiki. Is it better to have this page be the sole resource for this information? Is it better to merge this information into the individual articles and delete this article? Is it better to have both? My vote is to delete this one, and move the information into the individual articles. (not necessarily in that order) What do other people think? -- Xerxes 21:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC) *I think this article is perfectly fine as it is - it provides a quick reference to system transponders without having to go to each individual planet article to search for their coordinates. I say have the information on their respective articles, but also keep this one. Furthermore, I do agree with Hawke that the MUSH should reflect the canon locations of planets in the galaxy (having Coruscant being on the other side of the galaxy from Chandrila is absurd!), but as it stands, these are their official "coded" locations and shouldn't necessarily reflect their IC locations. When I was RPing out the Blitzkrieg, I didn't use the coded coordinates as my reference - I used the actual SW galaxy map. That's why I was able to blockade Coruscant after capturing Chandrila; if we used its coded location, it would have been useless. But ICly, CHandrila is located a few hyperspace jumps from Coruscant, so it works out ICly. Never let code get in the way of RP. --Danik Kreldin 22:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC) **Also, I know that there is a movement going on on the MUSH to improve/change the space system. Perhaps now would be a good time to request that the coded coordinates be changed to reflect IC? For instance, Coruscant being located at 0,0,0. (Sorry, Planet Starbucks.) --Danik Kreldin 22:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC) ***Agreed, and I think somebody taking a shot at coming up with that list (using the galactic map and Coruscant as an origin point) and posting it to the forum for discussion / reference is a good way to go about that. -- Xerxes 22:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC) **Is there much need for a quick reference of all system coordinates? Do people have a specific use in mind? -- Xerxes 22:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC) :- To the above... ""Canon" as it relates to this wiki is in reference to the MUSH and NO OTHER SOURCES." :I emphatically beg to differ; the very foundation of this Star Wars MUSH, and any Star Wars MUSH, is that which is canon in the Star Wars Universe. This MUSH is not exclusive unto itself. Whether or not it progresses from the baseline (such as a third Death Star destroying Sluis Van, a canon planet) is not the crux of the argument; however, any alteration to the baseline (such as claiming Luke Skywalker is not the son of Anakin Skywalker / Darth Vader, or that Wookiees are only four feet tall and hairless, or that Corellia is "next door" to Coruscant) is, and should not be undertaken. Similar grievous "manglings" would include playing a Basic-speaking Jedi Ewok, or that Darth Vader didn't die, or that a space station is the center of the galactic map (0,0,0). :That last one, by the way, was instituted by a former admin who didn't care a rip about the story (both the progressed story as we (the playerbase) shaped it or told it, and the baseline foundation story) and just wanted to dictate and dominate the MUSH as he saw fit. The trouble is, the admin, or those folks building the systems, just don't seem to do enough research into, or stay abreast of, the baseline story. -- Hawke / Rtufo 07:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC) *I actually agree as well that the coded coordinates should be more accurate and according to the canon Star Wars Galaxy Map. But still, as Danik said "Never let code get in the way of RP". Yet, getting this issue to admins and changing the way things are, could take a lot of time before it is done. For my part, at the moment, I believe it is best that we go with the coordinates we have, add them on each planet's page but also keep them on this one for quick reference.--Aayla 13:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC) I humbly request that further comments for the CANON thread be directed here: Forum:Canon sources for coordinates -- Xerxes 14:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)